§

Powermat Inc.

No. 77715011 (T.T.A.B. Jan. 17, 2013)
Powermat Inc.

5 Cited authorities

  1. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. v. Samara Brothers, Inc.

    529 U.S. 205 (2000)   Cited 776 times   41 Legal Analyses
    Holding that fanciful, arbitrary, and suggestive marks are inherently distinctive

  2. Qualitex Co. v. Jacobson Products Co.

    514 U.S. 159 (1995)   Cited 566 times   51 Legal Analyses
    Holding companies may not "inhibit[] legitimate competition" by trademarking desirable features to "put competitors at a significant non-reputation-related disadvantage"

  3. Application of Data Packaging Corp.

    453 F.2d 1300 (C.C.P.A. 1972)   Cited 7 times

    Patent Appeal No. 8592. January 27, 1972. Stanley Sacks, Boston, Mass. (Wolf, Greenfield Sacks), Boston, Mass., attorneys of record, for appellant. S. Wm. Cochran, Washington, D.C., for Commissioner of Patents; Raymond E. Martin, Washington, D.C., of counsel. Appeal from the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board. Before WORLEY, Chief Judge, and RICH, ALMOND, BALDWIN, and LANE, Judges. RICH, Judge. This ex parte appeal is from the decision of the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board, one member dissenting

  4. Section 1051 - Application for registration; verification

    15 U.S.C. § 1051   Cited 3,806 times   124 Legal Analyses
    Requiring a filing of a Statement of Use to register a mark

  5. Section 1052 - Trademarks registrable on principal register; concurrent registration

    15 U.S.C. § 1052   Cited 1,585 times   272 Legal Analyses
    Granting authority to refuse registration to a trademark that so resembles a registered mark "as to be likely, when used on or in connection with the goods of the applicant, to cause confusion, or to cause mistake, or to deceive"